Replies

But, you know, no matter how many people scream, kick and throw a fit, in the end only one thing matters. This company belongs to someone. That "someone" has the right, as owner and money maker of said company, to set rules, regulations and policy for the employees he/she hires. Of course, the law says you cannot discriminate, but it says because of race, color, religion, origin, etc. It says nothing about smoking, liking NASCAR, hating football, being a runner, playing poker, etc. So, if the owner determines that he does not want smokers on his payroll, it is his company and he can make those decisions. You may not like it, but you can go work somewhere else then. You have that choice, to work some where else. He has the right to expect lower medical costs, fewer health issues, etc., because he does not employ smokers. He can do that with his overweights also. Until that is the democrats get overweight officially listed as a "disease." Then he can't. But, since the democrats hate smoking and only like smoking because it has more victims, thus can sue the big tobacco companies for billions (their trial lawyer mafia that is), then they probably are going to get in a snit over it and some trial lawyer will represent these people in a class action suit and sue the company into bankruptcy.

"That "someone" has the right, as owner and money maker of said company, to set rules, regulations and policy for the employees he/she hires."

You're right, they do have that right. The key here is whether they made their smoking policy a condition for employment BEFORE they hired these individuals. If I take a job knowing the conditions for employment, and misrepresent myself, I can and should be fired after the fact.

If the employer, on the other hand, changes the rules for me after hiring me, the onus is on the employer to show that the change is for a reasonable cause.

For example, I hire you for a top position. You move your wife and kids at your expense, change schools, etc, buy a new house. After you settle in, I announce to you that as a condition for your further employment, you must provide your wife to me as a mistress two nights a week. Assume that this is in a state where sex is not illegal between unmarried adults. It sounds ridiculous, but the same rule making principles you state would apply, wouldn't they?

I am using my power as an employer over you to make you change your beliefs or lifestyle, after the fact of hiring you.

"So, if the owner determines that he does not want smokers on his payroll, it is his company and he can make those decisions."

I do see what you're saying and I agree with you somewhat. an employer does have the right to expect and enforce certain behaviors on the job - but not off it unless a criminal act is involved.

I see the health care cost argument but it's too dangerous in our particular culture. Today it's smokers, tomorrow it's pregnant women and guys who sleep around. Today it's a health care cost issue, tomorrow it's behaviors that contribute to mental health problems. Maybe like being a gun owner or a Christian. No thanks!

"You may not like it, but you can go work somewhere else then. You have that choice, to work some where else. He has the right to expect lower medical costs, fewer health issues, etc., because he does not employ smokers."

Agreed. I own a small business and the benefits of owning one are few and far between. It is good that I can make these kinds of decisions as to what my direct costs of running that business is. It is human nature that employees want it all and business owners want profit.